Ok - maybe I live in an "ideal" world or am mildly delusional... but why is it that people can't just disagree and discuss the things they think are good or bad about a topic (whether it be an album, artist, book, politician, idea, the universe, divine being, etc...) ...

Why is there always someone - no matter where you go ... that insists on talking louder, shouting, bashing, name calling, etc... if you don't think exactly like them?

I've experienced it in every forum on the internet, every stage of life from neighborhood friends to school to work... heck I had a manager tell me I was going to hell for not agreeing with his particular brand of christianity and obviously no matter what I think politically - I'm an "idiot" from at least one or more people.

What is it about some people that doesn't let them simmer down and calmly discuss things?

Good question, one that probably has no answer. Two rational human beings can have diametrically opposed viewpoints, and both be right from their own perspectives. That seems self-evident to me. But some people don't get this, or don't want to get it. I find myself just avoiding these types of people. Unfortunately, on the interwebz, you can't avoid them easily.

Some forums I frequent have an "ignore poster" feature - it sure is handy.

Logged

I wish I was a Glowworm; a Glowworm's never glum. 'Cause how can you be grumpy, when the sun shines out your bum?

Some people identify so strongly with their own preferences and beliefs that they feel if you don't agree fully, you're disrespecting them personally, or even insulting them. It must be a very stressful way to go through life, taking personal affront every time another person fails to share your outlook and tastes.

I think part of the issue is not just the "reactor" (i.e. the person who is doing the reacting) but also the originator. Example: A person loves Steve Roach's music. Someone else on a forum writes " I don't like Roach's music. I think it's boring." As the reactor, a person now has the opportunity to engage the opinionated poster with one of two approaches "Why do you think it's boring?" OR "Well, you just don't 'get' his music, obviously."

This kind of thing is always a two-way street. No matter how incendiary an initial comment can be, e.g. instead of the example above, suppose the first comment was "Roach really sucks. He's a no-talent ass clown." it's still up to you, the "listener" to decide how to react. Yes, the second comment appears to be mean-spirited and, at least in your opinion, it may also be ignorant and abusive. But, IMO, you only show your insecurity if you counterattack, so to speak (and this 'wisdom' is coming from someone who used to counterattack all the time, so I am pointing the finger at myself too). You may feel threatened by a contrary opinion or feel at least somewhat compelled to "defend" your opposite view. The latter is fine as long as you don't 'come after' the person. After all, it's just that person's opinion, really.

If I were to write "Sarah Palin is wholly unfit to be president." you might disagree with me and state that. But if I write "Sarah Palin is an idiot, but she sure is one hot MILF who I would happily nail." you might, if you respect her, want to come after me. It's totally understandable because, as humans, we have feelings and they get aroused. But, remember that your reaction says as much about you as the initial comment says about the poster.

At work, since Kathryn works in the same place I do, I hear negative things about her and about her department. As much as I want to defend her with passion, I need to step back and only make my own contrary opinions known in a calm, intelligent manner.

OTOH, in some forums, e.g. fark.com, flame wars erupt and they are almost done in the spirit of a "game." Obviously, the Hypnos forum is not like that and I respect that. Not all people find that kind of thing entertaining. But, it is sad that incendiary opinions can spiral downward so easily, as they seem to here. Frankly, I don't care what people say/write, no matter how "out there." I would only feel the need to disagree vehemently if I felt someone I knew personally (emphasis on the personally part...as I don't feel I know hardly anyone here that well, except maybe Jeff Pearce) was being attacked via patently untrue statements. If someone wants to opine that a musician is either (a) highly talented or (b) talentless and I hold an opposite opinion, I would just say that and be done with it. Same thing with an elected official, etc.

Lastly, it would be great to see people just be able to joke around with each other, even when virtual "tempers" flare. Life is too short to get that angry about someone just because you don't see eye with them.

Is that the show where she goes hunting with a fancy rifle with a fancy scope, and takes a half-dozen shots at an elk standing thirty feet away, and misses every time? She's a worse shot than Dick Cheney.

I wish Palin would keep her show in Alaska. We live in a world where people get killed for a different view point. People have been burned at the stake. I don't think the world will ever become an Eden. Conficting viewpoints to the point of war is a symtom of the dynamic world we live in, yin meets yang, kaboom! Flame wars on the internet are just the tip of the ice berg.

Logged

Ambient isn't just for technicians!

The artist isn't a special kind of man, but every man is a special kind of artist.

Is that the show where she goes hunting with a fancy rifle with a fancy scope, and takes a half-dozen shots at an elk standing thirty feet away, and misses every time? She's a worse shot than Dick Cheney.

Interesting page, I like the way they put "sleep with" in brackets, just in case you don't know the meaning of Bang in this context. Also there are quite a few undecideds, whats that all about then? You either would or wouldn't, simple enough question I would have thought